PAUL CRANEY: Markey's 'present' flap relevant to Beacon Hill

Last week, newly elected U.S. Sen. Edward Markey, who spent 37 years as a Massachusetts House member, voted “present” on a resolution in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to authorize the use of military forces in Syria. Markey’s decision to vote “present,” and his stated rationale for doing so, is relevant to Beacon Hill.

By Paul Craney

The Taunton Daily Gazette, Taunton, MA

By Paul Craney

Posted Sep. 9, 2013 at 12:01 AM
Updated Sep 9, 2013 at 9:19 AM

By Paul Craney

Posted Sep. 9, 2013 at 12:01 AM
Updated Sep 9, 2013 at 9:19 AM

» Social News

I took a step back from writing my columns in August so that I could dive back in after Labor Day. During that time, I received several emails from readers urging me to write about subjects that came up. As always, I appreciate the feedback and thoughtfulness from those who read my columns.

Last week, newly elected U.S. Sen. Edward Markey, who spent 37 years as a U.S. House member, voted “present” on a resolution in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to authorize the use of military forces in Syria. Markey’s decision to vote “present,” and his stated rationale for doing so, is relevant to Beacon Hill.

First, in a published statement, Markey justified his vote in the following terms: “The people of Massachusetts expect their representatives to have analyzed all of the facts prior to making a decision of this magnitude,” implying that he had been unable to do so before the roll call vote occurred. Although the Massachusetts Legislature does not vote on matters of war and peace, its decisions certainly have a substantial impact on the day-to-day lives of Massachusetts’ 6.6 million residents.

Second, the “present” vote that Markey took was in Congressional committee. It was an uncomfortable vote to take; the country was watching how the Senate was going to vote and because our federal legislative branch of democracy is leaps and bounds more transparent than our state legislative body, everyone knew that Markey voted “present.”

Here in Massachusetts, when our 200 lawmakers meet to conduct official business, their committee votes are not public. For years, reform has not been welcomed and inertia has set in among the majority of legislators to keep committee votes out of the public record.

National sunshine organizations routinely give Massachusetts low marks on certain transparency issues in state government. According to State Integrity Investigation (www.stateintegrity.com), Massachusetts earned an “F” for “public access to information” and “state budget processes” and only did slightly better with a “D+” grade for “legislative accountability.” Lawmakers need to be continually reminded that their job is to promote transparency in the legislative process, not run from it.

Recently, 123 state representatives and 35 state senators voted in favor of a vague, far-reaching new tax on computer software services, commonly referred to as the “tech tax,” “innovation tax,” and “software services tax.” The Legislature, without any public hearings on this new tax proposal, imposed a new 6.25 percent sales tax to computer services. This is unique for so many reasons, including that it’s a sales tax on services, in addition to consumption items.

This has been called “the most anti-competitive piece of legislation” in recent decades, which has in turn prompted some legislators to admit they did not fully understand the implications and to advocate for its repeal less than a month after they supported its passage.

Page 2 of 2 -
When pressed on their vote, legislators react in one of three ways. Some legislators will deny voting for the new tax, which is in conflict with their voting record. Others will acknowledge their vote was in error and either call for a repeal or begrudgingly agree it needs to be refined. The third response from some legislators is to defend the tax increase, saying that if they didn’t vote for it, the alternative would have been even higher taxes, which just isn’t true.

Despite each response, every member of the Legislature was provided the opportunity to support a measure that would have studied the economic impact the new 6.25 percent sales tax on computer software services before it became law and the Legislature voted against it.

The tech community is responding, but they need to understand that this is a long-term problem that will require a long-term solution. Like the tech community, the business community needs to comprehend that mobilizing is a start, but longevity is survival. Today, it’s the computer software services that are being taxed. What will stop the Legislature from imposing the 6.25 percent sales tax on other services such as legal and accounting services next?

While Markey continues to get pushback for his “present” vote, and I am not defending his vote, at least the public knows he preferred “present” over a “yea” or “nay” vote. Massachusetts lawmakers were able to impose a sales tax on services — some argue the highest of its kind in the country — through a process that didn’t require a public roll call vote in committee, a public hearing or studying the economic impact before it became law.

For the next industry that gets hit with a similar 6.25 percent service tax, here is its blueprint. Prepare yourselves. You can start by asking your lawmakers to make their committee votes public and require public hearings on new and higher taxes, and maybe by then Markey will vote yea or nay instead of present on major policy decisions.

Paul D. Craney is the executive director of Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance. Follow him on Twitter at @PaulDiegoCraney.